Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Mar 2008 21:49 UTC
Editorial "I used KDE as my primary desktop from 1996 through 2006, when I installed the GNOME version of Ubuntu and found that I liked it better than the KDE desktop I'd faced every morning for so many years. Last January, I got a new Dell Latitude D630 laptop and decided to install Kubuntu on it, but within a few weeks, I went back to GNOME. Does this mean GNOME is now a better desktop than KDE, or just that I have become so accustomed to GNOME that it's hard for me to give it up?"
Thread beginning with comment 306091
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Kubuntus fault
by elsewhere on Sat 22nd Mar 2008 05:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kubuntus fault"
elsewhere
Member since:
2005-07-13

Inevitably the sheer amount of external repos leads to loads of packaging conficts. The dialog box that pop's up is just plain hideous. Not to mention zypper and yast are damn slow.


Sheer amount? There's one external repo now, since the previous two merged into one as of 10.3. Anything else you could want is likely available in the build-service, which compiles packages against the various core versions of openSUSE, and automatically recompiles when a dependent package changes, specifically to bypass potential dependency issues. It is, frankly, a superior way of managing packages that the other distros are only starting to implement themselves. The only way to run into dependency issues is by mixing repos from different versions of openSUSE (which, sadly, people do), and the same thing will happen on any distro, dep or rpm. If you do happen to run into a dependency issue, it's a bug with the packaging that should be reported to the developers, as with any distro, deb or rpm.

If you want to complain about the the performance of Yast/zypper, that's fair enough, since even the devs have acknowledged it and reworked the backend for 11.0 specifically for (significant) performance improvements, but is it possible to have a discussion about deb vs rpm without falling into the long-extinct "dependency hell" issues? If you run into dependency issues on a modern system, it's a packaging error, and it's not like Ubuntu hasn't had similar issues with their hastily repackaged Debian debs in the past.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Kubuntus fault
by TheMonoTone on Sat 22nd Mar 2008 07:39 in reply to "RE[3]: Kubuntus fault"
TheMonoTone Member since:
2006-01-01

This just isn't true. In the combined ubuntu distros I actually have almost every library I need.

In the suse distros there's at least a half dozen missing. I'll even list them since you seem to be interested in fixing it.
bdb c++ bindings and headers for the version required by Ice
zeroc's Ice (all the bindings)
player/stage/gazebo
lame (yes that lame)

Actually, if opensuse had all those. I'd be using opensuse instead of shoddy kubuntu right now. Seriously. Ice has been sitting on the wanted list forever now though, and there's even a srpm available from them. Yet no one has bothered to modify it and fix it for opensuse. I would personally if I had the time and knowledge of rpm spec files (which seem pretty aweful).

Fix it please. And fix the crappy media playback situation as well. And the super long install times. And the zypper "I don't know what to do now" issues where it asks me, and I have no clue of course.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Kubuntus fault
by elsewhere on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 04:14 in reply to "RE[4]: Kubuntus fault"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Fix it please. And fix the crappy media playback situation as well. And the super long install times. And the zypper "I don't know what to do now" issues where it asks me, and I have no clue of course.


I won't argue against corner cases for packages that don't exist, particulary if you've opened a feature-request and the devs have ignored it.

Of course, if you were comfortable with .spec files (and there are both openSUSE howtos and irc-based packaging "days" for assistance), then you'd be able to put the package into the build-service yourself, for the availability of everyone. What better way to help contribute to the community?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Kubuntus fault
by _txf_ on Sat 22nd Mar 2008 14:51 in reply to "RE[3]: Kubuntus fault"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

I have never mixed different versions of repos. Nor would I call it dependency hell. Its just damn unfriendly, I can usually resolve these issued when that idiot box full of red and yellow highlights full of garbage text (incidentally zypper does the same but without the pretty colours) pops up telling me that there a conflict in packages that have been supplied by another repo. Its also fairly annoying that all the yast programs are separate.

Maybe I just like synaptic or adept and their speed too much. Searching for packages in adept is even faster than synaptic.

On the whole I would describe the apt system and the gui related tools in (k)ubuntu as being much more streamlined and more importantly easy for new users.

I will be watching for improvements in the future

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Kubuntus fault
by elsewhere on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 04:44 in reply to "RE[4]: Kubuntus fault"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

I have never mixed different versions of repos. Nor would I call it dependency hell. Its just damn unfriendly, I can usually resolve these issued when that idiot box full of red and yellow highlights full of garbage text (incidentally zypper does the same but without the pretty colours) pops up telling me that there a conflict in packages that have been supplied by another repo.


I keep hearing people imply dependency issues, yet they can never provide examples. If there are dependency issues, it's a bug in the packaging that the developers should be made aware of.

The other problem is reckless abandonment when it comes to adding repos from the build-service; some of them are clear in purpose, but adding sources from the experimental or developmental areas will result in conflicts, and that's by design, since those packages are often designed to replace core components.

As for the external repos, namely packman and guru, they are packaged specifically to not interfere with core packages. The only time a conflict will generally occur is if you try to update packages while having those sources disabled, which can cause conflicts since zypper can only resolve against the core packages that are obsoleted by the external repos.

I won't argue that dependency issues don't occur, in fact there is a common one with the KDE4 packages as the devs try and work on communal existence with KDE3, but I'd also say that in 9/10 cases where I've seen users run into dependency or unresolvable issues, it's because they've installed sources that should not really have been installed, so I'm admittedly cynical when I see blanket complaints about dependency issues. Particularly since I abuse my own system, with various OBS sources, and even intentionally mixing repos from stable and development, without running into the "frequent" dependency issues other people seem to with a standard config.

Its also fairly annoying that all the yast programs are separate.


Yast is a management infrastructure. Package management is one small part of what Yast provides. If Yast didn't separate the applications and functions, it would be a little cumbersome from a useability POV to have single application managing packages, security configuration, firewall settings, samba, apache, ssh, ftp, nfs, ldap, mail services, dns, dhcp, user management, sudo settings, network devices, audio hardware, display settings, bluetooth configuration, system updates, modem settings, isdn, pptp, desktop preferences, kernel settings, PCI settings, disk partitioning, LVM, bootmanager config, backups, harware profile management, and a few dozen other areas I have overlooked.

Yast is a complete environment, even with multiple programming interfaces, for supporting system management applications. Dismissing it because you don't like the package management is like dismissing Gnome because you don't like Nautilus or dismissing KDE because you don't like Konqueror. They're important components, but not solely representative of what the entire infrastructure can provide.

Maybe I just like synaptic or adept and their speed too much. Searching for packages in adept is even faster than synaptic.


.deb will always have an advantage there, since it's a package format that is basically proprietary to debian. It wasn't designed for non-Debian based systems, it doesn't have the file-based dependency system that rpm does (which frankly makes rpm a better "universal" solution that works without requiring an arbitrary set of packaging guidelines), so it doesn't have the same amount of meta-data to parse. I've used .deb on Ubuntu, and I won't deny it's "faster", but if RedHat and openSUSE decided on their own proprietary packaging formats specific to their own platforms, they'd have the same advantage.

On the whole I would describe the apt system and the gui related tools in (k)ubuntu as being much more streamlined and more importantly easy for new users.


This I won't argue, I'll be the first to admit that Yast package management could be a little more intuitive, and it's age is showing. But that is something they're looking at.

Reply Parent Score: 3